First of all, I love my .300WinMag but last last week after seeing a fantastic group from a friend's .338 (Ruger KM77) I started to take another look at this cartridge.

I found that with a 185gr Barnes XLC or TSX and from a 24" barrel the MV could reach easily 3350fps... with almost BC and SD figures close to a .30 cal bullet of 180 gr

In my .300WinMag a 180gr FailSafe reaches 3180fps with a max load of Re22

Well, simple is as simple does...and a .338 bullet of 185gr launched 200fps more than the .300WinMag 180grainers will deliver more energy and a flatter trajectory, and all we know that comes with elevated MV

In short, I used to think that my .300WinMag was a fantastic vehicle for Long Range Hunting, but what about this .338WinMag load???

Please, any advise is welcomed!

It's my understanding that a 180gr .338 runs out steam very quick down range. It may be faster at the muzzle, but it can't deliver the energy down range with those light bullets.

I'm not a big .338 hunter, but most that are say a 210gr bullet is the starting weight for a .338

Terry

Terry,

The BC of a .338 Barnes TSX is about 0.431 so while low than a 180gr Barnes, it's very comparable to a more conventional .30 cal bullet of 180gr like a Nosler Partition or many others.

So, if you have comparable BCs but higher speed, there is no way a .338 bullet will lost velocity, hence energy faster than a .300

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
It's my understanding that a 180gr .338 runs out steam very quick down range. It may be faster at the muzzle, but it can't deliver the energy down range with those light bullets.

I'm not a big .338 hunter, but most that are say a 210gr bullet is the starting weight for a .338

Terry

That's a pretty good assessment Terry. I personally don't use anything less than the 230 gr FS but I know plenty of people that use the 210 gr NPT with good results. Any less than the 210 defeats the purpose of going to the bigger bore.

Gustavo, It's been my personal experience that bullets seldom act in real life as they do on paper.

Terry

I have shot both for years albiet my 300 is a an H&H..I shoot it with 200 and 220 gr. bullets mostly..I shoot my .338 with 210 Noslers at 3005 FPS and 300 gr. Woodleighs at 2400 plus...I have shot the 300 Win Mag in the past and on several safaris...My son shoots the 300 Win and loves it...

I have shot all manner of game with both in the USA and several foriegn countries...

Based on that I think I will definately go with the .338 as my pick for the best all around caliber in the world today...even more than my wonderful 375 H&H, a caliber I dearly love...

That's not saying I would ever part with my 300, I would not...but no 300, not even the Wby is in the same class as the 338 IMO...

quote:

Originally posted by Gustavo:

I found that with a 185gr Barnes XLC or TSX and from a 24" barrel the MV could reach easily 3350fps... with almost BC and SD figures close to a .30 cal bullet of 180 gr

.308" 180 gr Barnes TSX BT SD=.271 BC=.552
.338" 185 gr Barnes TSX BT SD=.231 BC=.437

There is quite a bit of difference in sectional density.

.338 bullets with a Sectional Density closer to the SD of a 180gr .30 caliber bullet:

.338" 210 gr Barnes TSX BT SD=.263 BC=.471
.338" 225 gr Barnes TSX FB SD=.281 BC=.482

-Bob F.

I have slowly over 2 to 3 years weaned myself off of speed unless it gets me more than 2 to 3 inches less drop at 300 yards sighted in at 200 yards. Using this philosophy the 338-06 operated up to 65,000 psi is better than BOTH the 338 Win Mag and the 300 Win mag. My 180 ballistic tips do 3000 fps and do anything that the 300 Win Mag will do in the field. Heck, 2160 FPE at 300 yards is enough for thin skinned gae. The .338 180 has the same sectional density as the .308 150 but is much tougher.

The Speer 250 GS does 2645 fps with R19 at safe pressures. The 338 Win Mag will do 100 fps more but why would I WANT more?

Woodleigh 300s do 2323 fps with R22...I prefer 1 or 2 more in the mag than the extra 150 FPS of the 338 Win Mag.

All this and the 338-06 needs 2 inches less bbl than the Mag version and 4 inches less than the 300.

The idea of the post was, primarily, to ask for opinions on the stated fact and if possible, to hear from real experiences of using the .338WinMag with 180 or 185 grains bullets.

Here are some ballistics (again, I have a .300WinMag not a .338WinMag, so this is NOT a case of my car is the best, because I own one...)

.300WinMag
- 180gr Nosler Partition BC=0.471, SD=0.271
- MV = 3180fps

.338WinMag
- 185gr Barnes TSX BC=0.437, SD=0.231
- MV = 3320fps

Both MVs are from real loads

at 600yds :

.300WinMag, Energy=1687.5, Drop = -83.3
.338WinMag, Energy=1772.1, Drop = -78.2

While the SD of the .338 is lower by 17& I really don't care. Please for anyone interested I have posted many times my views on the SD issue (many posts around there)

While Ballistics don't lie, I grant that they don't tell the whole picure, but are most useful to aid in these discussions.

BC, SD, yadda, yadda... bottom line, the real reason's to get a 338 over a 300 WM is the ability to handle heavier bullets and efficiency in shorter (21-22") barrels. If both sport 24" barrel's I'd always rather have a 300 with a 180 than a 338 with a 185...

quote:

Originally posted by Gustavo:
While Ballistics don't lie,

Oh, but they can. Try shooting both of those over a chronograph at distance and you'll see the real world BC difference is quite a bit more than advertised.

quote:

Originally posted by Jon A:
Oh, but they can. Try shooting both of those over a chronograph at distance and you'll see the real world BC difference is quite a bit more than advertised.

Ok, but as you know we are dealing here with company's published values. And as said before, the MVs were measured, actually out of 24" barrels.

Also the published BCs from Barnes bullets are in some cases...very high to my taste...

Again the whole point here is to establish a baseline between the two cartridges, and how well the .338WinMag performs with a 185gr bullet (I guess, it's a litlle less overbore cartridge compared to the .300WinMag hence more efficient)

It'd be nice to hear from real hunting experiences with the lighter bullets (premium types, of course) in the .338

Comparing BCs from different manufacturers is an exercise in futility. Comparisons between bullets from the same manufacturer can give some small measure of useful information. Even though the 338 is my most used cartridge I wouldn't recommend one if you were looking for something to shoot 180 grain bullets through. With the greater selection of .30 caliber bullets in that weight available I think the 300 would be slightly better, especially if you already have a good shooting one.

Not better but different. Out to 300yds, the .338wm is a better hammer (IMO), but only w/ bullets 225gr & up. Past 300yds, I would rather shoot 180-200gr bullets from the .300wm.

I'd choose the 300 win mag loaded with 168 gr tsx @ 3300 fps for species under 200 kilos, and opt for the 338 win mag with 225 tsx @ 2900 for species over 200 kilos.

Each cartridge has their niche, but I wouldn't consider one better than the other. It just depends on the use you have for it.

Nope...

I own 3 different 338's and only one 300 Win Mag...

Even tho I am not a Mag fan ( for personal use), as I don't need it for my hunting.... I think one is splitting hairs over the 338 and the 300 with one being better than the other....

Sure a 250 grain bullet at 2700 is a hard hitter or hammer as someone put it... however a 220 grain bullet out of a 300 Mag at 2800 to 2950 fps has no flies on it either....

Anyone think either one would fail with most hunting applications most users are ever faced with? NOT to include Alaska Bears or Cape Buffalo..... Then they still will both do the job; just requires a cooler shooter who knows where to place the bullet.....

cheers
seafire

For most hunting, this is sort of a flip-of-the-coin judgement call. There always seems to be an undercurrent of thinking when comparing similar cartridges that says the bullets from one are going to somehow bounce off or otherwise not kill well, while the other one is going to drop everything like a bolt of lightning. Imaginative thinking, but usually far from the truth.

I go back with both of these cartridges some 25 years. I own specimens of each, have hunted extensively with specimens of each, and have killed many of the same species with each. I'll likely never be without a pair of .300 Win. Mags and a pair of .338 Win. Mags. in my battery. In my experience, there hasn't been a dime's worth of difference in the way these two cartridges drop big game up through elk and moose in size. Hit an animal well with a good bullet from either one, and you have yourself a trophy. One hasn't whimsically failed while the other has emerged superior, at least not in my experience.

This year I'll be using a .300 Win. Mag. for plainsgame in Tanzania, elk in Oregon, whitetails in Idaho and Texas, plus hogs in Texas. I'll be using a .338 Win. Mag. for elk in New Mexico. This use ratio is very typical for me on a year-to-year basis.

Generally, I like the .300 Win. Mag. better than the .338 Win. Mag. I've found the .300 shoots flatter past 300 yds., kicks less, and is far less fussy in terms of being load-specific. The .300 is a more inherently accurate cartridge, and you can e-mail an accuracy-oriented riflesmith like Kenny Jarrett for a verification of that reality. If the .338 was "just as accurate" and "just as flat-shooting" as the .300, it would have been used forty years ago for various long-range high-power competitions. The truth is, it never has been (not that I know of), while the .300 Win. Mag. has won countless long-range high-power championships, including the prestigious 1,000 yd. Wimbleton. You don't see any expert Coues deer hunter shooting a .338 either. Truth, not fiction or supposition............

To me, the .338 is wonderful with 210 Noslers, but really comes into it's own with 225 gr. and 250 gr. premium bullets for mountain grizzly and elk in semi-timbered or timbered country. It's a heavy-bullet cartridge, by intent and by design, and should be used accordingly. With 250s, it's like a big .30-06 shooting 180s.

AD

Allen Day, I agree with you 100% Thats why I own the 338 Rem Ultra Mag. It is in a completely
different class from the Mighty 300 Win Mag.

AD - Dittos

Gustavo

Let's look at some numbers.

I can easily get 3200 fps out of my 300 with a 180 grain TSX but have never loaded a 185 grain bullet in a 338, so lets use your 3350 fps

Exbal ballistics program for these 2 loads at 7000 feet altitude zeroed at 200 yards:

300 win 180 TSX BC .552 at 500 yards

Energy - 2590
Velocity - 2546
Drop - 29.1
Wind Drift - 10"

338 win 185 TSX BC .437 at 500 yards

Energy - 2590
Velocity - 2511
Drop - 28
Wind Drift - 12.3

Now the 300 arrives with the same energy as the 338 but with a sectional density of .271 as compared to .231 for the 338. I don't know if you believe in sectional density or not but the 300 bullet will penetrate further. If you're shooting at a Bear, Moose, or Elk at 500 yards, IT WILL MATTER!

With the 338 you're using approximately 5 more grains of powder (read more recoil) to accomplish the same but with less penetration.

Where's the advantage?? The 338 definitely shines with the larger bullets on large game North of the U.S., but not with light for caliber bullets.

Now if you can get 3350 out of your 338, you need to work on that 300 to the same level, cause you can get more velocity than you listed if you tried. Then the 300 starts walking off and leaving the 338 in the 180 grain bullet category.


Without guns we are subjects, with guns we are citizens

quote:

BC, SD, yadda, yadda...

So few words, so much truth. Well said Brad.

Jeff

When bullets of equal SD, of the same manufacture, and same physical form, are compared, the 300 has a significant trajectory and velocity advantage. The only way the two are brought closer is by using different SDs and different bullets.

If 3350 can be obtained "safely" in a 338 with a 185 TSX, then a 150 TSX loaded to the same pressure in a 300 should get 3500 fps.

Not to mention that rifles have a twist rate that is generally made to fit a certain class of bullet weight. Probably, the 338 is not set up to shoot the 185 as much as it is set up for the 210 to 250 grain category. Just like the 300's are generally made to shoot the 180 to 200 grain categories. I could be wrong on this, I'm just guessing. But if so, the 185 grain 338 bullet might be hard to get an accurate load. Like buyijng a one ton diesel to haul a 10' 4 wheeler trailer.

I have had both 300 win mag and many 338 win many 338 win mags.They wre both accurate as heck.The 300 were Browing Bars and shot 1"groups at 100 yards.The 338s were old and new Ruger model 77s and a Winchester Stainless with a boss.The 338s would shoot the Remington 225 gr that use to be loaded with Speer Grand slam bullets in groups 3/4" at200yards.I have had nothing but good luck with the 338s but gave the 300s to my dad.I didnt see the need for both.I also didnt see that much difference between the 30-06 and the 300 win mag to need both.I did see a hudge killing difference between the 338 and the 300 and the 30-06.I shot deer with the 200 gr winchester power points with the 338 from 3 yards to 425 yards.They never moved from the 338 but I had several run with shot from the 300 with 180 gr bullets.The 338 would kill them running and flatten them in their tracks.It hardly ruined any meat where the 300 tore up a bunch of meat with lots of blood shot.I finally shot a decient black bear with the 338 with 225 gr bullets through both shoulders.It stopped on the far side so I switched to the 250 gr for even more penetration.I met two caribou hunters who had used the 185 gr barnes bullets on caribou with their 338 ultra mags.They had to shoot them 3 and 4 times each.It is alot better for long rang shooting with the 338 to use the serria 250 gr bt .I now have 9 338s and have a had time hunting with anything smaller.I shot a deer and two pronghorns with my 264 win mag and decided that that was about as big if game I would ever hunt with that gun.

These numbers games are fun. Since I hunt primarily in Africa I tend towards the heaviest bullets in a caliber and don't see myself shooting at anything over 300 yards, with so far no shots over 200 yards. The numbers at 500 yards don't have a lot of relevancy for me. So here goes. The assumptions are:

200 grain Nosler Partition in .308, SD 0.301
250 grain Nosler Partition in .338, SD 0.313

Muzzle velocity of 200 grain .308 is 2800fps
Muzzle velocity of 250 grain .338 is 2700fps

BC of 200 grain .308 is 0.481
BC of 250 grain .338 is 0.473

Energy at 100 yds of .308 is 3033ft/pounds
Energy at 100 yds of .338 is 3504ft/pounds

Energy at 200 yds of .308 is 2629ft/pounds
Energy at 200 yds of .338 is 3020ft/pounds

With zero at 200 yards for both cartridges:
drop at 300 yds of .308 is 5.10 inches
drop at 300 yds of .338 is 5.70 inches

All of the above is derived from the Nosler Reloading manual and it compares two similarly constructed bullets from the same manufacturer. Draw your own conclusions.

2800 is a really light load for a 200 out of a 300 WM.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
I'd choose the 300 win mag loaded with 168 gr tsx @ 3300 fps for species under 200 kilos, and opt for the 338 win mag with 225 tsx @ 2900 for species over 200 kilos.

Each cartridge has their niche, but I wouldn't consider one better than the other. It just depends on the use you have for it.

Agree 100&. A nice, well balanced answer.

tks!

quote:

Originally posted by woods:
AD - Dittos... Now the 300 arrives with the same energy as the 338 but with a sectional density of .271 as compared to .231 for the 338. I don't know if you believe in sectional density or not but the 300 bullet will penetrate further. If you're shooting at a Bear, Moose, or Elk at 500 yards, IT WILL MATTER!...[/i]

Do you really believe that in the real world, 0.008" more or less and 5 grains more or less will make any significant difference ???

Well, I admit that SD of the .338 bullet is 17% less. Please, read the post on SD (many weeks ago to have an insight at this irrelevant figure)

quote:

Originally posted by Gustavo:

quote:

Originally posted by woods:
AD - Dittos... Now the 300 arrives with the same energy as the 338 but with a sectional density of .271 as compared to .231 for the 338. I don't know if you believe in sectional density or not but the 300 bullet will penetrate further. If you're shooting at a Bear, Moose, or Elk at 500 yards, IT WILL MATTER!...[/i]

Do you really believe that in the real world, 0.008" more or less and 5 grains more or less will make any significant difference ???

Well, I admit that SD of the .338 bullet is 17% less. Please, read the post on SD (many weeks ago to have an insight at this irrelevant figure)

I don't know where that .008" came from. The difference in sectional density of these two bullets is significant and I feel crosses the threshhold where one is a suitable bullet for large game and the other is not.

The discussions on this forum about sectional density, momemtum, etc. were just a lot of egos poking and prodding at each other and did not reach a conclusion that I could tell. Whatever you want to call it, a 180 grain 300 win mag bullet and a 185 grain 338 win mag reaching a target at the same speed will not penetrate equally. I purposefully mentioned 500 yards and bear, moose, elk, because that is where the difference will be evident.

Wink,

I have NO problem with the 338 in the bullet weights you mentioned and think it is an admirable cartridge. NOT SO with the 185 grain bullet. And JonA was correct, I normally push my 200 grain TSX's out of a 300 win mag at 2950 fps.


Without guns we are subjects, with guns we are citizens

quote:

Originally posted by Gustavo:
SD (many weeks ago to have an insight at this irrelevant figure)

The fact that SD, by itself does not mean absolutely everything (tell me something that does?), in no way means it is irrelevant. Those who believe so have been mislead.

JonA and Woods, yes the 2800 fps for the 200 grain Nosler Partition is not a real burner, but, in my 24 inch barrel, with the short box in Model 70 and with that particular bullet, I don't get much more than that. I accept fully that others can get more. All this would do is up the energy somewhat for the .300 and lessen the drop at 300 yards slightly. It still wouldn't make the 200 grain .308 bullet the equal of the .250 grain .338 bullet which would have greater weight, greater SD and greater energy. Now, in African hunting conditions at least, I don't know of too many shooters who can make that 1 and 1/2 inch holdover adjustment at 300 yards that is the only real "disadvantage" of the .338.

quote:

I don't know where that .008" came from. The difference in sectional density of these two bullets is significant and I feel crosses the threshhold where one is a suitable bullet for large game and the other is not.

The discussions on this forum about sectional density, momemtum, etc. were just a lot of egos poking and prodding at each other and did not reach a conclusion that I could tell. Whatever you want to call it, a 180 grain 300 win mag bullet and a 185 grain 338 win mag reaching a target at the same speed will not penetrate equally. I purposefully mentioned 500 yards and bear, moose, elk, because that is where the difference will be evident.

Woods,

This is not the appropiate post, but the discussion on SD gave very good insight on the matter. Please, if you have the time, take a new look and put aside the egos poking.

You will be surprised when presented with real life test on penetration, that's regarding your assumption that one bullet will penetrate more than the other...many of these test account for the real perception that there is no real correlation between SD and Penetration.

What matters is, besides filght dynamics, is construction and materials

I agree with Allen, esp his comment on the use of the .300 Win Mag in competition. You can't argue with that (well, I guess you could if you had a lot of time on your hands).

On the other hand, I practice with my .338 a lot at long range, so I feel comfortable with it. Laser rangefinders pretty much make trajectory a moot point (but not wind drift). But any .300 Mag is a better overall gun for NA.

I could take any discussion on BC and SD and flush it down the toilet. Use a reasonable bullet and spend more time either hunting or shooting, and less time worrying or pontificating.

Just my 2 cents.

The final statement here is, IMHO, very sound advice. For my purposes, here in B.C., I much prefer the .338-250 premium bullet combo and have only owned three .300 mags. I hunt in country that is always broken by timber and where an encounter with an aggressive Grizzly is always a possibility, so, the bigger gun feels better to me....BUT, a recent examination of a Kimber 8400 Montana-.300 WSM makes me think that I "need" another .300, the Montana.

AZ, do you agree with Allen or not?

So, the 300 has the edge for longer ranges over the 338 but we should flush BC and SD down the toilet? Drop isn't the enemy, wind is? Of course forget about meaningless BC but look out for that wind!

I don't follow. It does or it doesn't. If it does, it comes from something other than its sexy looks. They're meaningless or they're not. Lots of wind drift makes things more difficult or it doesn't.

And since when does choosing one bullet over another mean one can't practice as much? It's not as if the bullets such pontificating would lead one to chose (225 AccuBond, 250 Sierra, etc) are highly expensive.

If trajectory is a moot point and wind drift is the enemy, the 180 grain-range of 338 bullets isn't likely the best choice for longer ranges--and yet Gus thought it probably was or he wouldn't of posted about it. Maybe listening to some pontification would do him some good.

I really don't see the value in telling somebody the answer, agreeing with others' good answers but then mocking the physical reasons behind why these answers are good ones. Other than it's a "popular" thing to do on these boards.

under 300 yards goes to 338 win

Yes It is better under 200 yards with the 250 grain bullet
IMO

[QUOTE] But any .300 Mag is a better overall gun for NA.[QUOTE]

For Alaska I prefer the .338WM and the heavier bullets (230, 240, 250, 275 and 300 grains).

quote:

Originally posted by Jon A:
AZ, do you agree with Allen or not?

So, the 300 has the edge for longer ranges over the 338 but we should flush BC and SD down the toilet? Drop isn't the enemy, wind is? Of course forget about meaningless BC but look out for that wind!

I don't follow. It does or it doesn't. If it does, it comes from something other than its sexy looks. They're meaningless or they're not. Lots of wind drift makes things more difficult or it doesn't.

And since when does choosing one bullet over another mean one can't practice as much? It's not as if the bullets such pontificating would lead one to chose (225 AccuBond, 250 Sierra, etc) are highly expensive.

If trajectory is a moot point and wind drift is the enemy, the 180 grain-range of 338 bullets isn't likely the best choice for longer ranges--and yet Gus thought it probably was or he wouldn't of posted about it. Maybe listening to some pontification would do him some good.

I really don't see the value in telling somebody the answer, agreeing with others' good answers but then mocking the physical reasons behind why these answers are good ones. Other than it's a "popular" thing to do on these boards.

Jon A:

My point, which I poorly communicated, is that either cartridge works well. I practice with both at ranges out to 850 yards (well, not the .338, because I run out of elevation).

What I have learned is that it takes a lot of BC and speed to make any noticeable difference in wind drift. Range just doesn't matter much anymore - wind does. And granted, a .300 Win drifts less, but most guys never practice at 600 yards (they don't even have a place to shoot that far), and that is what matters. Show me a guy who shoots a .338 Win a lot and he will beat a .300 Win guy who spends more time on the internet than shooting.

Ray: for Alaska, I agree. The .338 Win is my favorite for Alaska as well as Africa.

quote:

My point, which I poorly communicated, is that either cartridge works well. I practice with both at ranges out to 850 yards (well, not the .338, because I run out of elevation).
....
Ray: for Alaska, I agree. The .338 Win is my favorite for Alaska as well as Africa.

Points well taken, AZ

By the way, I have communicated with a guy from Canada who is into all sorts of cartridges, including the .338WM. His rifles are very accurate, and even his .338's hit around 1" at 200 meters with bullets from 180-210 grains. He shoots all his rifles quite a lot, and none of the barrels are factory barrels. He is into accuracy. A couple of years ago he dropped a grizzly from 170 yards or so, with one shot from one of his .338's. He used a 225-grain A-Frame. The bear rolled Down the hill after the shot, very dead. Now that I have talked about this guy, I will have to drop him a note. He has posted here in the past.

I know what you meant, AZ, and of course you're right. But I had to address what you said. As one of those "Engineering types" it always bothers me a bit to see statements telling people to ignore the reasons why things work the way they do.

And in this case, a simple understanding may be helpful to somebody. Take the below comparison, for example:



Maybe not a huge difference, but a significant one. If two identical guys load up some ammo for their 338's and go practice at 600 yds, the guy with the 225's will likely have a better day than the guy with 180's even if it's only a mildly breezy day. Even at 4-500 there's a nice improvement if the wind is bad.

But the main point is this improvement is basically "free." Just by choosing a heavier bullet of the same type. Same rifle, same potential accuracy from that rifle, same power level, etc. With all the hoops we handloaders jump through looking for that last nth degree of accuracy, leaving such a significant gain on the table doesn't make much sense, to me, anyway.

About the only thing one is giving up is a trajectory that's a little flatter. But of course you agree with me that you aren't really losing anything there either--if shooting out where it makes a difference you had better be using a rangefinder, in which case the extra drop is easy to compensate for.

And if you actually want to kill something beyond a few football fields away, you're gaining a load that will hit a lot harder the farther you go.

Anyway, I suck at wind doping. I cheat any way I can.